Talk:Andrew Bogut

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Andrew Bogut. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.nba.com/bucks/news/MB_070413.html
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.nba.com/bucks/news/MB_070416.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:37, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Andrew Bogut. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160322150444/http://www.utahutes.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/andrew_bogut_73116.html to http://www.utahutes.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/andrew_bogut_73116.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.woodenaward.com/andrew_bogut
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/8689937/andrew-bogut-golden-state-warriors-admits-microfracture-surgery-indefinitely
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hoopsworld.com/andrew-bogut-is-getting-blood-manipulation-treatments/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:14, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Sydney signing

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Basketball_Association#Bogut_signing regarding press conference tomorrow about Bogut and Sydney.—Bagumba (talk) 11:36, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

FIBA Under-19 World Cup MVP

The FIBA Under-19 World Cup MVP award for an under-19 age tournament is WP:UNDUE to bloat Bogut's infobox further. It's mentioned in the article still. Per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE: The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance.—Bagumba (talk) 08:53, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Content re: Bogut's support of conspiracy theories

The reason for the latest lock was edit warring over sourced content; DaHuzyBru deleted the content last [1]. The rationale doesn't hold--there was clearly not a consensus to remove the content, and the accounts removing it were all new WP:SPAs, not a discernible 'community.' If SF Gate isn't deemed enough of a source by itself, it's not hard to find WP:RELIABLE sources. For Pizzagate, [2]. For vaccine rant, [3]. It may well be debated whether the content belongs here as WP:NOTNEWS, and I welcome others to weigh in. It also appears that his views are more nuanced than the headlines suggest. But if we're deleting it, let's do so with a real rationale, and with consensus. Thanks, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 23:35, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for starting this discussion. WP:ONUS seems applicable here: ... not all verifiable information needs to be included in an article. Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article, and that it should be omitted or presented instead in a different article. It seems we're now in the discuss phase of WP:BRD.—Bagumba (talk) 02:16, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Activist first added the content--perhaps they'd like to join the discussion. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:17, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Bagumba I discussed the edit with the long time editor who deleted it last. He has no problem with me undoing his revert. The 11-minute video Bogut posted to his Instagram account in which he said he and unnamed others had been offered money by unnamed persons to support the Aussie lockdown remains posted https://www.instagram.com/tv/CS00F6nnygH/ There was considerable press coverage for his tweeted support of the Pizzagate conspiracy theory in November and December 2016. There's nothing wrong with the SF Gate as a source as it's the leading such news source in the San Francisco Bay Area, associated with a newspaper that's been around for maybe 120 years. The story has a number of hyperlinks to other RSS within it. Activist (talk) 08:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Activist:: I assume you are referring to DaHuzyBru? He wasn't the only editor who reverted it. At any rate, discussion here is preferable to reach a consensus if any further disputes should arise on this topic. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 09:03, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Activist reached out via email. I noted that if he wanted to revert me, then I essentially won't be fighting any further over content I don't have much passion for. Consensus should probably be reached here though, but I doubt many will chime in. DaHuzyBru (talk) 10:32, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Bagumba There were four (?) IP editors who reverted, plus (?) one SPA who reverted three times in one day, the only edits that User has ever made. I wrote directly to the remaining User, DaHazyBru because I've seen his edits for years, knew him to be extremely knowledgeable and never had any problems with any editing he's ever done. Had he noted a specific problem with my edit, I would have certainly given his objection due respect. I've been editing for 15 years and have never written to any editor about an edit with which I disagreed, but wanted to avoid an edit war with what may have been a single SPA who moved from a MacDonald's to a Dairy Queen to a Burger King to make his or her IP reverts. When I restored and modified my original edit, I modified it slightly after having watched the 11-minute Instagram video posted by Bogut himself, and also added a new citation that was a contemporary one from the Pizzagate issue five years ago, rather than depend solely on the SF Gate citation hyperlinks. Bogut's comments were made in a context where hundreds of domestic anti-vaxxers, anti-maskers and lockdown protesters had been arrested in Australian demonstrations. Activist (talk) 13:25, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't have an opinion at this point. Just want to minimize reverts here on my watchlist. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 13:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Bagumba Hi I am new to the editing, I will have to study how to do it more comprehensively but my main reason for editing the Bogut page was that I think calling him a conspiracy theorist is a bit far, I understand the pizzagate part is certainly a conspiracy but the parts about Australia to be honest are pretty well founded, there is no doubt lockdowns here have disproportionately affected the poor. there is extreme frustation here the foodbank was closed to the poor because it was overwhelmed our politicians in Victoria have recieved extreme pay rises while many are going poor playgrounds were closed to children the claim about celebrities getting paid is not completely unfounded, collingwood captain scott pendlebury gave a thumbs up on the post and many celebrities have been on ads, instagram etc. promoting to stay at home etc while many of those telling us to stay home fly in and out as they please cases are increasing despite these harsh lockdowns even with the vaccine rollout even our prime minister flew for fathers day while many cannot see their families if anything Andrew Bogut is a hero for speaking out certainly not a conspiracy theorist. Agnesblack77 (talk) 10:12, 7 September 2021 (UTC)agnes

I can certainly add more sources to back these points up. Currently, my main issue particularly is this part "In 2021, via his Instagram account, he further claimed that the Australian government's lockdowns, prompted by a rapid rise in COVID-19 infections were a scheme disproportionately experienced by the working class.[62]As contagion rose, " the rest of the section I suppose I could live with being labelled conspiracy although questionable and i mean currently the main source of this "new edit" is from SF gate i mean, a San francisco newspaper is not reliable for an Australian problem, Bogut also states "So we should let it rip? No we shouldn't let it rip, but we also shouldn't be locking down the way we are, I think there's a middle ground." it is no conspiracy to suggest that Australia/Victoria has botched the handling of this - thoughts? - Cheers Agnesblack77 (talk) 13:47, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm pinging Neiltonks, who had reverted your last edit, for their perspective.—Bagumba (talk) 08:22, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

The reason for my revert was that it removed sourced content and to support this cited in the edit summary an item in The Guardian which is actually an opinion piece and therefore not something we place any reliance on - it's just someone else's opinion. Personally I'd not have any objection to this section saying that while some people criticised him, others supported his stance - provided both statements were backed up by citations to reliable sources, of course. If that were the case, that would probably justify changing the section name too. Neiltonks (talk) 11:52, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Of course, i can certaintly agree to that Neiltonks, I was just new to this and was just trying to level the argument quickly and was underprepared is all haha but here are more this report here from the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee states "the pandemic continues to have an unprecedented impact on all Victorians, some groups have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic including: the homeless, people with a low socio-economic background, insecure workers, Aboriginal Victorians, those who are culturally and linguistically diverse, women and young people." so that claim is substantial, I could gather more sources for this if needed but hopefully the above suffice. As for the calling out celebrities I can see this may be a controversial opinion but does that mean a conspiracy theory? i thought that usually concerned something secret and illegal and there is heaps of advertisements and stuff of celebs promoting public health advice in our media, i am not saying it is wrong but as i linked in above articles on this point ^^ our celebrities are moving with a lot more agency here. and here are some articles about celebrity endorsement Guy Sebastian recently got in hot water here for backing away from promoting this stuff but as he said and 50/50 here would agree "it is not there place" this does not classify as conspiracy to be angry about people who are skipping quarantine and moving with more freedom than your average joe but perhaps you guys may have a different opinion on this point though? (but the rest i feel definitely has sufficient evidence) Cheers Agnesblack77 (talk) 13:50, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

My advice is to limit the use of sources that don't mention Bogut specifically. Otherwise, there's a risk of turning his bio into a coatrack for a wide range of politics.—Bagumba (talk) 15:17, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

References

ok cool! i tried again hopefully that is better. thanks Agnesblack77 (talk) 12:11, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

I didn't look at any of the content, but I did change the header to a more neutral "Political views" per WP:CSECTION and reworded "claim' per MOS:CLAIM.—Bagumba (talk) 12:19, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

oh thats even better thank you Bagumba! best regards Agnesblack77 (talk) 14:48, 9 September 2021 (UTC)